48 best free apps from Microsoft
in [Freeware]
|
From: za kAT on 7 Mar 2010 11:26 On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 10:13:06 -0500, KristleBawl wrote: > You know I agree with you on a lot of points. This particular issue, > Internet Explorer, I happen to disagree. That doesn't make you or me > wrong. We just have different opinions. If I was you, I'd distance myself pdq from this clown. His reply to this post is preposterous, part libellous, twaddle. Wake up lady, only muppets align themselves with lusers. -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat
From: »Q« on 7 Mar 2010 18:15 In <news:Xns9D34341741FD0bearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.250>, Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote: > =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <boxcars(a)gmx.net> wrote in > news:20100306200806.5f40daef(a)bellgrove.remarqs.net: > > > In <news:Xns9D33C61B992Ebearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.247>, > > Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote: > > > >> KristleBawl <kristlebawl(a)some.email> wrote in > >> news:hmusiu$kdv$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > >> > >> > Internet Explorer is *not* freeware, it's a supplement to the > >> > Windows OS and bundled with the windows OS, except in the EU. It > >> > is available online as a download intended for upgrading or > >> > reinstalling on Windows OS computers by Windows OS customers. > >> > > >> These words are not the words in the EULA. > > > > The important words in the EULA, which you've snipped, were "You may > > not use it if you do not have a license for the software." > > And I have stated that there is nothing wrong with that. I've never said anything is *wrong* with it, only that having to buy a license for it means it's not freeware. You're the one who keeps introducing the straw man about something being *wrong* with selling software. > You do not buy IE8 and you well know it. Technically speaking, you only buy the license to use IE8. But you knew that. >> Do you consider all the commercial software you've bought to be >> freeware, because you don't have to pay anything more to use it once >> you've bought it? > > This is an utterly stupid argument. It's not an argument at all; it was a question about how much commercial software you consider to be "freeware" despite having paid for it. I was curious about whether you apply your peculiar way of thinking only to Microsoft's payware or to other payware as well.
From: »Q« on 7 Mar 2010 19:19 In <news:Xns9D34B7B4BCBBFbearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.247>, Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote: > =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <boxcars(a)gmx.net> wrote in > news:20100307171534.12ec899d(a)bellgrove.remarqs.net: > > > I've never said anything is *wrong* with it, only that having to > > buy a license for it means it's not freeware. > > If you think repeating a falsehood will make it a truth, you are > wrong. I don't think repeating a falsehood would make it a truth, but that has nothing to do with the idea that that having to buy a license for an app makes that app non-freeware. > You can't buy a license for it. Show me a monetary receipt > that you have for IE8. You can't! I probably have the most recent one, which is many years old, saved as a pdf somewhere, but I'm not going to show you receipts of things I've bought no matter how much you demand them. > I have other freeware that requires a license for the > software, but they give it to ya, That's a very different case than the one of IE8, for which you have to buy a license. > just like MS does for IE8. Nope, not like that -- see above. > If you had an older MS OS and wanted to buy IE8, you couldn't do it. Sure I could. I just wouldn't want to buy another license for it. > Why? Because they give it to you free. No, they sell it to you, as you and I have already discussed. >> You're the one who keeps introducing the straw man about something >> being *wrong* with selling software. > > If you think twisting an argument into something else will make it > something other than it was, you are wrong. I'm not the one constantly inventing new straw men, Bottoms -- you are. Sometimes you even manage to defeat the straw man you set up, but not this time. It's sad, really. >>>> Do you consider all the commercial software you've bought to be >>>> freeware, because you don't have to pay anything more to use it >>>> once you've bought it? >>> >>> This is an utterly stupid argument. >> >> It's not an argument at all; it was a question about how much >> commercial software you consider to be "freeware" despite having paid >> for it. I was curious about whether you apply your peculiar way of >> thinking only to Microsoft's payware or to other payware as well. > > Ok, it's a stupid question. AFAICT, you only think of Microsoft's payware as freeware, since that's the only payware you call "freeware", so I asked; if you find the question stupid, just think about how strange it looks that you call any payware at all "freeware".
From: Anonymous Sender "Anonymous Sender on 7 Mar 2010 19:43 On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:03:33 GMT, Bear Bottoms wrote: > If you think repeating a falsehood will make it a truth, you are wrong. > I never ran drugs. See, didn't work for me either. Well said.
From: »Q« on 7 Mar 2010 20:10
In <news:Xns9D34C02D14185bearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.247>, Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote: > =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <boxcars(a)gmx.net> wrote in > news:20100307181941.67a3f68d(a)bellgrove.remarqs.net: > > > I probably have the most recent one, which is many years old, saved > > as a pdf somewhere, but I'm not going to show you receipts of things > > I've bought no matter how much you demand them. > > You can't show a receipt for IE8...they don't exist. Technically, it's only a receipt for the license. IIRC, it cost me 90 USD or so. And again, I'm not going to show you receipts for anything I've bought, including the stuff you call "freeware". > You are a liar. You keep using that word. You should look it up. |